pattern of urban commuters

7/28/2019 Pattern of Urban Commuters

1/5

Changing Patterns in Daily Routine among Urban CommutersSandhya Rani P J*

Nafisa Khan**

Charumathi P J****Sandhya Rani P J , PhD Research Scholar, Department of Applied Psychology, JBAS College For

Women, Teynampet. Chennai.

**Nafisa Khan, PhD Research Scholar, Department of Applied Psychology, JBAS College For Women,

Teynampet. Chennai.

***Dr Charumathi P J, Research Supervisor, Guest Faculty, Department of Psychology, University of

Madras, Chepauk. Chennai.

Introduction:

Lifestyle is determined by ones attitudes, beliefs and opinions (Assael, 1998).

The daily routine is an indicator of ones lifestyle. The lifestyle of those living in theurban setting and those living in the rural setting differ widely due to reasons like access

to comforts, distance and time taken to commute from one point to another and the socioeconomic status.

In the past decade Census reveals that there has been 85% increase in households

owning cars. The reasons could be that globalization has led to the introduction ofmultiple brands of cars that cater to different levels of income groups. Dual income

families and loan options have facilitated the purchase of cars. For the multitasking

individual owning a vehicle is out of necessity more than comfort. In spite of public

transport being cheaper it is seen as a facility that is not comfortable due to overcrowding and time consuming. Apart from privately owned vehicles there is a rise in the

number of private buses that caters to students of colleges and employees of companies

often working on shift basis 24/7 in Special Economic Zones which are located in theoutskirts of cities. Call taxis and shared auto rickshaws have also increased in numbers.

These changes have caused inevitable traffic congestion in the city not only during peak

hours but also through out the day. However, the options and comforts available for

families in the rural setting is not the same as that in the urban setting. School drop outrate was found to be higher in rural schools than in urban schools. (Usha Jayachandran,

2007). The school drop out rate was higher among rural girls as compared to urban girls.

(Usha Jayachandran, 2007) One of the reasons for school dropouts in the rural settingswas observed to be distance from school and lack of time for parents to drop them at

school (Govindraju and Venkatesan, 2010).

Need for the study:According to Taylor (2004) daily hassles have a cumulative impact on health,

making them a bigger stressor than any other. Health psychologists have identified traffic

as a routine stressor. It causes time delay, noise pollution and air pollution. Thereforetraffic not only causes stress but also affects health. Growing traffic congestion has

affected the respiratory health status of children in urban setting (Nandasena,Vikramesingheand Sathiakumar, 2012).Long-term infrastructure development projects like metro rail project, highways,

flyover constructions and maintenances have resulted in narrowed roads, bottlenecks and

changed route. However, owning a vehicle also facilitates traveling anytime anywhere

and gives the freedom to plan their time schedule. With all these changes the need tounderstand how commuters deal with this constant stressor was felt.


2/5

Method and design:

The aim of the study was to identify the measures taken by commuters to adapt to trafficcongestion. The study was an exploratory study conducted using interview checklist

survey technique. Convenient sampling method was used in this study. The sample

consisted of 65 Chennai city residents in the age group of 30 years to 50 years out of

whom 32 were men and 33 were women.Inclusion Criteria: Owners of two-wheeled and four-wheeled vehicles were

included in the study.

Exclusion criteria: Commuters who use public transport like buses and trains

were excluded from the study.

Sample consisted of 23 two-wheeler owners, 24 four-wheeler owners and 18 commuterswho used both.

Tool used for the study:

Interview checklist:

An in-depth interview was conducted with five commuters. Open-ended probingquestions to understand traffic stress and changes in activities revealed changes and

adjustment made which have been listed. Based on the responses an interview checklistconsisting of 34 items describing the changes in their routine to cope with the traffic wasdeveloped. The checklist consisted of 19 items (shown in Table:1) that indicated

measures to accommodate traffic and 15 items (Table: 2) that indicated lifestyle changes.

Data:Primary data was collected from commuters who had come to drop their children

to school and from individuals who were on their way to work.

Analysis:

Percentage analysis was done for the frequency of changes adapted by therespondents.

Results:

Commuters have reported that they use vehicles to commute to office, to goshopping, to pick up and drop children at schools and for extra curricular activities, to

visit friends, relatives and for picnics and outings.

The changes observed among commuters in their routine due to traffic have beentabulated in Table 1 and Table 2.

Table 1

Changes due to Traffic.

Item No Traffic stress

N=65

Percentage

TS1 Affected by traffic jam. 95.4

TS2 Change route. 93.8

TS3 Avoid main roads. 47.7

TS4 Take by lane, small lanes 76.9

TS5 Affected by noise 81.5

TS6 Affected by smoke 87.7

TS7 Complete all tasks en route destination 38.5

TS8 Go out during weekends only 52.3


3/5

TS9 Avoid traveling during heavy traffic 58.5

TS10 Shopping/visiting for weekends only. 67.7

TS11 Move closer to work place / school/college 49.2

TS12 Car pool to work ( sharing transport) 35.4

TS13 Shop in the neighborhood /nearby area. 80.0

TS14 Avoid long distance driving. 83.1TS15 Use public transport to avoid driving. 46.2

TS16 Rest well before trips 63.1

TS17 Avoid self-driving (use a friend or a driver ) 33.8

TS18 Avoid driving alone 35.4

TS19 Avoid going out at all 50.8

Table 2 Changes in lifestyle.

LS1 Start earlier to work. 84.6

LS2 Eat breakfast /lunch in the vehicle 20.0

LS3 Change vehicle (Upgrade/ Downgrade) 20.0LS4 Rent a cab in spite of owning vehicle 29.2

LS5 Frequently go out on picnics 21.5

LS6 Do more long trips. 24.6

LS7 Travel late nights often 26.2

LS8 Have more number of vehicles 26.2

LS9 Do more things as I have my own vehicle 76.9

LS10 Do things by myself as I can drive 75.4

LS11 Attempt all pending tasks in a single day 56.9

LS12 Listen to music / chants / FM Channels. 64.6

LS13 Complete phone calls. 35.4

LS14 Reading newspapers, essential materials. 35.4

LS15 Visit more people and places due to vehicle 61.5

Results indicate that commuters were affected by traffic (95%). They were also

affected by the smoke (87%) and noise levels (81%). To accommodate this they changed

their routes (93%); used smaller lanes and by lanes (76%). They planned their shoppingonly during weekends (67%) and prefer to shop in local and nearby areas(80%).

Commuters try to avoid the rush hour driving to escape traffic (58)%and also avoid long

distance driving (83%)and sometimes even going out at all(51%).The results indicate that commuters tried to avoid the stress caused by traffic by

either by avoiding it or finding alternate ways of reaching places. This in turn increased

noise and pollution in residential lanes posing as a major health hazard. Traffic stress hasbeen found to have influenced the well being of the urban population leading to

depression (Gee , Takeuchi 2004).

Commuters were able to do more things in a day as they had their own vehicle

(76). They try to complete all tasks on their own (76%) and try to complete it on the sameday itself instead of distributing it over the week (56%). They have developed new habits

like listening to music, chants and radio while traveling (64%). Also they have the liberty

of exploring new places like malls and restaurants (62%). They also leave for work early


4/5

(84%). Eating in the car and night driving have also become more frequent as commuters

enjoy the privacy and freedom their vehicle provides. Having a vehicle has empoweredcommuters to include new activities in their routine and also they have displayed changes

in their work habits.

The findings throw light upon the fact that although long term projects and

increase in traffic are inevitable they have affected the citizens lives to a great extentresulting in lifestyle changes. Such changes can gradually lead to a change in work

culture and habits of people.In spite of the RTE act (2010) girls in the rural settings face many hurdles in

continuing their education. Social stigma against womens education is high in the rural

settings. Disapproval by family members in the name of safety and future concernsduring marriage has been the reasons cited by girls for discontinuing education. Parents

stated that there is no time to accompany children to school due to housework were the

most cited reasons for higher school drop out rates among girls (Uma Rani 2010).

Cleaner air and lesser pollution may be the benefits enjoyed by rural citizens yet,the benefits of owning vehicles like saving time, facilitating school drops and pick ups

need to be made aware for rural citizens so that they do not discourage rural girls fromattending schools under the pretext of lack of time and safety.

Future directions:

An awareness programme on the benefits of transport is necessary for those living inrural setting to save time, effort and for the continuity of childrens education.

Further studies on working and non-working people in rural and urban setting arenecessary to understand the effect of traffic stress.

Car pooling and public transport system needs to be encouraged to reduce costs, fuelconsumption and pollution.

Changes across different age groups can help identify the target group for whichawareness programmes are necessary.

Conclusions:1) There are changes in daily routine due to traffic stress.

2) Commuters have displayed changes in their daily patterns as a result of using privatetransport.

3) Changes in lifestyle can lead to gradual changes in the habits and culture.

References:

Assael, H (2001): Consumer Behaviour and Marketing Action . India: Thomson.

Chennai Transport (2005): retrieved on 13th

February 2012 from http://www.ctn.org.in/problems-of-

chennai.html

Gee GC, Takeuchi DT (2012): Traffic Stress, Vehicular Burden and Well-being: a Multilevel Analysis.

Journal of Social Science Medicine. Jul;59(2):405-14 retrieved on 13

th

February 2012 fromhttp://www.pubmed.com.

Govindaraju R and Venkatesan S (2010): A study on school drop outs in rural settings. Journal of

Psychology 1(1) 47-53

Nandasena S, Wickremasinghe AR, Sathiakumar N(2012): Respiratory Health Status of Children from

Two Different Air Pollution Exposure Settings of Sri Lanka: A Cross-Sectional Study. American

Journal of Industrial Medicine. Feb retrieved on 13th

February 2012 from http://www.pubmed.com.

Taylor S (2001): Health Psychology. India: Tata McGraw hill.

Usha Jayachandran (2007): How High are Dropout Rates in India? Economic and political weekly,

March 17 2007. Retrieved on 28th

March 2013 from http://www.krepublishers.com/02-Journals/JP/JP-


5/5

01-0-000-10-Web/JP-01-1-000-10-PDF/JP-01-1-047-10-009-Govindaraju-R/JP-01-1-047-10-009-

Govindaraju-R-Tt.pdf

(2012) Vehicles in India retrieved on 21st

February 2013 from

http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-03-20/chennai/31214306_1_households-public-

transport-wheelers

Uma Rani (2010): Reasons for Rising School Dropout Rates of Rural Girls in India An Analysis

using Soft Computing Approach. Retrieved on 28th

March 2013 from http://www.journalcra.com/?

q=node/786

pattern of urban commuters

Documents